Is everyone on these boards a fan of optomization?

[Bigmouth]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

[Waazraath]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

No, definitely not. Personally I am, but plenty of folks aren't happy with optimizers, up to the point that we had discussions on wether optimizing is really a 'thing' in 5e (due to its much simpler mechnics compared to earlier editions).

As for your questions:

Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? For me, yes, mental exercise, definitely. But also: optimizing for me isn't per se having the 'best' character of doing the most damage, but also: optimizing to make a fun/illogical concept work (good enough to be playable) and group optimizing (build something that maximally enhances my party), or whatever. And those are perfectly playable in a group with non-optimizers.

Is this how people on here typically play? Don't think one can make a general statement on that, too many folks for that.

Everyone allows multi-classing? No. I do in my current game as DM, but not in the one I ran before that (too many new folks with little gaming experience, I prefered them learning the standard game first).

Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible? No, same as above. And no to the second, that's boring. My groups play mostly fun characters, not to 'win' or for maxium damage. I've for instance never had a PAM, GWM or SS user in one of my games.

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up? Can't say, haven't experienced it. In general, you need either a) all , optimizers, b) all non-optimizers, or c) a combination, but one where the optimizers optimize for something else then personal power (cool concept, or optimization in service of the party, like buffers). Else it can lead to trouble and people not having fun.

[Frozenstep]

I'm a newer player that started with 5e. With that said, I've heard the problem of optimization is less of a concern in this edition than before. Building a competent, competitive character is as simple as making a single classed character that picks up feats make sense and/or choosing spells that are decent.

I haven't seen hostility for that kind of simplicity.

[Dork_Forge]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

In my experience feats and multiclassing (though sometimes with RP reasons required) are common, but optimization isn't as prolific. People tend to have a concept and play that out rather than min maxing, you do need a mechanically successful character to a certain extent to have fun (DnD is largely based around combat after all) but in 5e it's pretty difficult to make a bad character that can't contribute in some way.

[Thrawn4]

Speaking as somebody who doesn't play D&D (didn't get the chance, although I would probably be wary of the suggestion), I prefer simple games with little optimization potential. Lacking that, there is usually a gentleman's agreement on the envisioned power level.
I get my excitement from meaningful decisions and dense atmosphere. Mostly, that is. Although I used to have a lot of fun with optimization in the past.

[Sigreid]

No, I dont care 4hat much about optimization. That said, part of why 8 come here is to read other ideas on what could be done. Where the boundaries are.

[LudicSavant]

Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

Eh. If people were truly no-holds-barred optimizing, then you'd see a lot more Glyph demiplanes and Simulacrum loop armies and Coffeelocking than you do. People usually optimize within self-imposed limits, like "I want to make the most of X concept." For instance, if people were just motivated by power, Moon Druid would probably be more popular than it is. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?588791-Fun-little-questionnaire-on-dnd-5e) (More data (https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/19029-are-there-up-to-date-statistics-on-race-class))

People like to make effective characters, but generally aren't all that set on "the absolutely most powerful combination possible." It was like this in older editions too; nobody would actually bring Pun-Pun to a table in 3.5e.

[jjordan]

Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible? Different people take different approaches. Some people approach this like a video game with a number of encounters leading up to a boss encounter. Some people are more into the roleplaying and storytelling aspects. Some people are more into the miniatures wargaming aspect. I know that I've never put together a power-build character. I'm always more interested in putting together an interesting character for the setting we're playing in. So, no, not everyone is a power gamer. Not even on this board.

[Demonslayer666]

Depends on the game, but in our regular game we prefer interesting over efficient.

[Zetakya]

Most people want to optimise within the boundaries of a character concept. Questions about how you build the most effective demonologist, or the best way to make a Cleric effective at ranged combat are not a problem..

Everyone wants to be having a fun time while playing; to a certain extent that requires optimisation (& understanding of how to effectively use the character's abilities), otherwise you just end up with frustrated players and that's no fun for anyone concerned.

[Contrast]

Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats?

I'm a little surprised you link these two to optimising.

Most of the multiclassing I've seen done has been actively detrimental to the power level of a character and its one of the few ways in 5E to really build an actively bad character. 5E has generally been pretty good about ensuring that multiclassing is even at its best usually more of a trade off than a straight boost in power.

As for feats - they probably are a power boost generally speaking but they're also just much more interesting than ASIs.


Generally speaking I like my characters to be effective (being able to do the things you want to do is fun!) but aren't particularly bothered if other characters are built poorly. It made me twitch when I saw the barbarian with an odd strength score and dex score use their ASI to boost their intelligence and wisdom scores (putting both to odd numbers...) but after making sure they understood what they were doing I didn't say anything else.

It does grind my gears a little bit when people play their characters poorly however. I don't expect everyone to remember all the rules but try and remember your own class features at least :smalleek:

[Dessunri]

No, I dont care 4hat much about optimization. That said, part of why 8 come here is to read other ideas on what could be done. Where the boundaries are.

This. I'm definitely more of the type to play something that is fun. I'm going to be spending hours and hours playing this character I want to make sure I like it. However, I do like to read the optimization guides and to see people's different ideas. It helps me understand what's possible within the game and many optimization guides give solid reasons why they rate a skill/ability/weapon/etc they way they do so that it helps me make a better decision on what I want out of my character. I've never followed an optimization guide to the letter; but, I have definitely taken inspiration from them.
As for multi-classing, unless there's a good RP reason for it I don't like to multi-class. I don't disallow it at my tables even if there isn't a solid reason for it other than pure optimization.

[Keravath]

There is a wide range of players and interests. Some folks just like to play a concept and aren't concerned how close it is to being mechanically optimized. Others like to play a particular concept as well as they can within the allowed rules. There are also folks who are into making the "best" character possible at one thing - melee damage, skill monkey, ranged damage, fire damage etc and build the character to do that one thing as well as the system allows.

The big advantage of 5e is that the difference between optimization and not is probably less than 50% effectiveness in many cases, whereas earlier editions could be a factor of 2 to 4. This means that as long as your character has a decent score in their primary stat and is not more than a level or two behind everyone else picking up the power bump at 5 (and somewhat less at 11 and 17) .. then the character can be fun to play and will contribute effectively.

Personally, I am usually in the camp that likes to create a role playing character concept and then utilize feats and multiclassing to achieve that goal while making them as mechanically effective as possible.

[jaappleton]

I am an optimizer.

And while I have absolutely theory-crafted how much damage certain things can push out under various conditions (Because theory crafting is fun to me), I think I've played something that was total BS levels of unfair... Once.

If I'm a Wizard, yeah, I want max INT. If I'm a Barbarian, I absolutely want max STR.

But I also try to embrace flaws. My 20 Str, 6 Int Barbarian is fun. He can't read. He once unfurled a spell scroll, saw funny shapes, and then tried copying it. It involved a lot of stick figures of himself getting bigger, and telling the Wizard to use it to make him bigger. Because THAT is how spells work, according to him. >_>

Point is, optimizing I think is fine and understandable. Even should be encouraged. Everyone wants to be heroes, and to beat the evil leader. And you can't really swing that greatsword with 5 Strength...

Now, should you yell at someone for only having 15 Str instead of 16, at level 1? No. Don't yell at that person, they're doing fine.

[Talsin]

People like to make effective characters, but generally aren't all that set on "the absolutely most powerful combination possible." It was like this in older editions too; nobody would actually bring Pun-Pun to a table in 3.5e.

I'm gonna agree with LudicSavant on this one. 5e generally has a lot of "Timmy" & "Johnny" players with the rare "Spike" type personality. Since the game can't exactly be "won", a "Spike"-type player won't get a lot of enjoyment from D&D, let alone 5th edition.

And if you don't know what I mean by "Timmy" or "Johnny" or "Spike", here's a link: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/making-magic/timmy-johnny-and-spike-2013-12-03

[zinycor]

Most people want to optimise within the boundaries of a character concept. Questions about how you build the most effective demonologist, or the best way to make a Cleric effective at ranged combat are not a problem..

Everyone wants to be having a fun time while playing; to a certain extent that requires optimisation (& understanding of how to effectively use the character's abilities), otherwise you just end up with frustrated players and that's no fun for anyone concerned.

These are pretty much my thoughts on the matter.

[Particle_Man]

It is interesting to read but I don’t usually play high optimization. And my DM usually had the
Monsters charge the nearest opponents, usually the fighter types in the front, so we don’t have to worry about lockdown builds or the like, for example.

[Zuras]

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?



On forums, and honestly at all the tables I’ve played or DMed at, everyone expected at least a modest amount of optimization from anyone who wasn’t a completely new player. Silly ideas were fine, as long as you planned the mechanics so you weren’t a liability. Playing an 8 Intelligence Orc Wizard who relies on a careful selection of non-save spells is fine, but if you know what you’re doing and still play a melee Fighter with a 10 Constitution, though, you are viewed as no better than “it’s what my character would do” guy.

Also, keep in mind that party optimization is much more exciting to most players than individual character optimization and number crunching. Even players who don’t care about min-maxing their stats get excited when they pull off cool combos. When the Monk stuns someone and the Wizard Disintegrates them, or the Bard triggers 3 AOs with a Dissonant Whispers, there are high fives all around. I have plenty of players I who don’t worry about their precise stat allocations who will pore over their spell lists and allies abilities looking for crazy combos.

[Max_Killjoy]

Depends on what you mean by "optimization".

If you mean "ignoring everything else in favor of creating the most mechanically advantaged build possible", then no, I am not in favor of it.

If you mean "using system knowledge to make the character at the system level as close as possible to the character in the fiction level, both positive and negative", then I'm completely in favor of it.

And the latter can include both modelling accuracy and resource efficiency. Back on the old HERO forums, there was always a debate between "you should always use the cheapest way to build a power or ability" vs "you should always default to the most expensive way to build a power or ability"... and I'd always chime in with "what ever happened to choosing the build that most faithfully represents that power or ability?"

[Rukelnikov]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back?

Not sure why optimizing wouldn't be laid back, aside from that, mostly yeah, curiosity gets to me and I scratch that itch, can I get expertise in every skill? Can I deal more than 1k damage in a single attack? Can I break the sound barrier? etc. etc. etc.

Its like doing a math exercise, I do (or did...) them as a hobby.


Is this how people on here typically play?

Dunno, but its important to differentiate theorycrafting from chargen, theorycrafting are numbers on a sheet or screen, its not a character.


Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats?

My biggest gripe during the 2e era, was how narratively constrained characters were, if you began as a Elven Rogue at lvl 1, and within your first few levels met a Magical Guild, become one of its members and spent 3 centuries studying magic with them, well... tough luck, you are never gonna learn it, because at lvl 1 you picked Rogue, your character was effectively gimped from a narrative standpoint since it wasn't allowed to change what it was.

3e fixed that, I have no intention of going back to forcibly single class characters.

Regarding feats, I play with them, I like the idea of them while maybe the existing ones for 5e are not as customizing as I'd like them to be, my table plays with them, (and likely wouldn't accept to play without them).



Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

Multiple reasons why this is not the case, but i'll say there are different types of players, tables, and campaigns. Some players may try to bring "the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible" (and they would likely not be doing it, since unless we have an equivalence class of them, there would only be 1 such combination, and thus only 1 possible build would fit the criteria... I digress sorry), in my experience that is generally not the case, and 5e does a good job of managing that, where even a pretty optimized character won't be incompatibly ahead of a simple straight Battlemaster, as could have been the case in 3x.

In my group at least, there's kind of a tacit agreement not to try to break the game (so no one is gonna attempt Chain Simulacra or GoW+Haste, etc), there's only 1 player that would try to do that stuff, but she's a pretty bad optimizer so there's not normally a prob.


If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

Well, that's what I meant before when I talked about 5e doing a good job a it. If the player can't keep up because of his tactical thinking, then they will be notably behind, but that's not the system's fault, assuming similar capabilities in the players, at the time of taking tactical decisions, the difference being in the character building department, even the straight Champion will be able to pull his weight no problem.

Unless someone is actively gimping himself (muticlassing things tha thave no synerguy whatsoever and make the character worse than if it was single class like Barbarian/Wizard or some such, and even then I'm pretty sure it can be made to work...), he's not gonna be left in the dust (assuming equity in everything besides build, so comparable amount and usefulness of magical equipement, comparable tactical acumen, etc.)

[Pex]

I'm an optimizer and don't apologize for it. I don't care what you play, up to a point. It's your character. Do what you want even if you make choices I wouldn't. The "point" I'd have a problem with is if you make an incompetent character on purpose, the opposite of optimization. If you purposely make your character to be ineffective I find that a disruption that ruins the fun. The party as a whole is weakened by your lack of contribution.

For those players who don't realize they made bad choices and are willing to improve I'm happy to help if they want help. I always ask what the player wants to do and show the various methods that can achieve it, not just the optimized way but all ways that are good enough to get the job done. The player makes the choice.

[darknite]

To be frank, I've never played with people who don't do some degree of optimization on their character. Some are better than ever and some push too hard (the term munchkin came from somewhere). As to 'how do the others keep up', well, they do just fine. 5e makes it hard to have an ineffective character and usually a player needs to make unusual choices to drop their game effectiveness.

[Davo]

Theorycrafting and exploring options can be liberating. Since my Warlock's best combat action (even with a +2 spear) is to drop Hypnotic Pattern, then focus Agonizing Blast etc. on a single target, this analysis has freed me up to take a pact and invocations that seem like fun and are more in line with my character concept, without worrying that I'll be doing a few less DPR. And I can give that magic spear to the Monk without regret.

[Rukelnikov]

Theorycrafting and exploring options can be liberating. Since my Warlock's best combat action (even with a +2 spear) is to drop Hypnotic Pattern, then focus Agonizing Blast etc. on a single target, this analysis has freed me up to take a pact and invocations that seem like fun and are more in line with my character concept, without worrying that I'll be doing a few less DPR. And I can give that magic spear to the Monk without regret.

Yup, that's one of the things that make Locks my faves in 5e, if I just take 2 lvls in warlock, then It just doesn't matter what other options I take, I will never be useless in combat, and am "free" to take whatever I want for 18 levels without being a burden.

[RickAsWritten]

For this forum, I'd say it's a good mix of mechanical optimizers and thematic optimizers. Healthy optimization.

My problem comes from the YouTube crowd. There are hundreds of videos spouting pseudo-marketing word-vomit like:

"THE MOST BROKEN MULTICLASS IN THE GAME!!!!"
"THIS SPELL WILL BREAK YOUR CAMPAIGN!!!!"
"THESE MONSTERS ARE RUINING THE GAME!!!"

It bothers me because new players or people that want to get into the game will see these videos and think that this is how everyone plays or how they should play; infantile, self-serving and with a fake veneer of expertise. In my time DMing and playing AL, there was a large portion of newer players (especially teens and preteens) that had this outlook or came to the table with these (often illegal)builds, and had to be taught that this is not how we play a cooperative game.

[Zetakya]

"THE MOST BROKEN MULTICLASS IN THE GAME!!!!"
"THIS SPELL WILL BREAK YOUR CAMPAIGN!!!!"
"THESE MONSTERS ARE RUINING THE GAME!!!"


Sounds like the perennially banned "Sorcerer King" idiot who appears here every so often with his "One Round Only how can you survive" nonsense.

(Side note to new members: if he posts, report and ignore)

Most of the really gibbering idiots don't understand the actual game mechanics and rely on very very dubious interpretations of rules or just outright break them.

[Seclora]

I have noticed that this forum does tend to be fairly optimization geared. Most of the regulars know the names of the strongest builds in class without needing to look them up, and I think most of us know what makes them strong. When builds are put forward, the conversation usually is geared toward how to make them more effective at their trick, or to remove their weaknesses. A lot of the time when people come asking for a build for their character, they get advised to build one of a handful of race-class combinations that we know will be, at the least, on the upper percentiles of effectiveness. We like to optimize.

Me, I started on 3.5, and I will never be able to see 5e as being truly broken. I've built and played Uberchargers and Metamagic reduction casters, and had them be weak compared to most of the table. 5e has a low ceiling by comparison, and I prefer that. And that is the thing to remember, we like to play strong characters, but generally we don't feel a need to dominate the table. At the end of the Campaign, what matters isn't that you beat the boss, it's that the whole table had fun. We generally seem to get that in this forum, even if we do still enjoy theorycrafting the optimal spell damage by level for appropriate CR encounters.

[Nagog]

Personally, I feel optimization is more thought exercise than anything else. I enjoy D&D as an outlet for my storytelling (I'm far to ADD to actually sit down and write it out), and to provide my friends with a fun and relaxed social environment. While I enjoy playing optimized builds because being effective is fun, I much prefer builds that have a narrative purpose. For example, I have a character I've built as the perfect conflict instigator to play in a game to incite war between two nations that already have a tense relationship. I enjoy learning about optimization because in so doing I learn of other builds and combos that can help create characters that fit new roles, new playstyles, and new stories.

[NRSASD]

Ha. haha. hahaha. No. I'm not really a fan of optimizing; but to each their own! I come here for the assistance with brainstorming.

[Bigmouth]

Thank you everyone for the interesting replies!

On the last point I asked, it was more a question of whether I as DM should be stepping in to coach optimization I suppose. In my current game my daughter is a brand new player (Yay!), my wife is a long time roleplayer who dislikes game mechanics, my daughter's boyfriend is an experienced player who can talk serious optimization (I haven't played with him enough to know what type he is) and my best friend is in love with discussing and optimizing the heck out of game systems. He generally builds characters that are significantly better built than anyone at the table. He wants to be able to contribute in any situation while being the best at 1 or 2 (or 3 or 4). He is 2nd level warlock and is about to multiclass into Sorcerer...for rp reasons. I fear for my daughter the bard and my wife the ranger losing some enjoyment from what might be coming my way.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

Presumably because it's what bears discussion. Why would I bother having a discussion about how fluffy my build is, because fluff doesn't matter and doesn't really bear discussion beyond me and my group.

Also I'd definitely always allow feats, they're described as "optional" but martial classes with a bajillion ASI are built with taking them in mind.

[J-H]

Optimizing is fun, but I like how 5e is generally well-balanced enough that there is not a huge gap between the "floor" (minimum optimization) and the ceiling (max CharOp), aside from perhaps the Ranger and a couple of subclasses that are more NPC-designed. From what I've seen, optimization in your tactical play is more important than in your character building.

[LudicSavant]

Thank you everyone for the interesting replies!

On the last point I asked, it was more a question of whether I as DM should be stepping in to coach optimization I suppose. In my current game my daughter is a brand new player (Yay!), my wife is a long time roleplayer who dislikes game mechanics, my daughter's boyfriend is an experienced player who can talk serious optimization (I haven't played with him enough to know what type he is) and my best friend is in love with discussing and optimizing the heck out of game systems. He generally builds characters that are significantly better built than anyone at the table. He wants to be able to contribute in any situation while being the best at 1 or 2 (or 3 or 4). He is 2nd level warlock and is about to multiclass into Sorcerer...for rp reasons. I fear for my daughter the bard and my wife the ranger losing some enjoyment from what might be coming my way.

Encourage an atmosphere of camaraderie. Make the players feel like they're all in it together and that they will all succeed or fail together. If you do this successfully, you won't need to step in to coach optimization because the weaker players will seek help from the stronger players, and the stronger players will offer it.

You already have said that your friend loves discussing the system. I expect he'd be happy to help out the rest of his party with optimization advice.

[Sigreid]

Most I will do is make a suggestion for them to think about.

[Bobthewizard]

I like talking about optimization on here and theory crafting builds, but don't really care much about optimization when I play. I'll take bad spells that are fun or fit my character, multi-class for character over abilities, and play weaker classes and subclasses and still have a great time.

I might say something if someone tries to take Witch Bolt or True Strike, though. :smallsmile:

[zinycor]

Thank you everyone for the interesting replies!

On the last point I asked, it was more a question of whether I as DM should be stepping in to coach optimization I suppose. In my current game my daughter is a brand new player (Yay!), my wife is a long time roleplayer who dislikes game mechanics, my daughter's boyfriend is an experienced player who can talk serious optimization (I haven't played with him enough to know what type he is) and my best friend is in love with discussing and optimizing the heck out of game systems. He generally builds characters that are significantly better built than anyone at the table. He wants to be able to contribute in any situation while being the best at 1 or 2 (or 3 or 4). He is 2nd level warlock and is about to multiclass into Sorcerer...for rp reasons. I fear for my daughter the bard and my wife the ranger losing some enjoyment from what might be coming my way.

Are the optimizing guys also good/passable roleplayers? Do they try to force the other players into optimizing their characters? Are people at the table enjoying their time?

If there aren't major problems on those lines, it should be ok.

Now, most optimizing is done with damage in mind, so if you prepare encounters to be varied, where chasing, enemies giving up, intrigue, and whatever else you can think of, PCs optimized for damage will shine without leaving the other PCs behind.

[Seclora]

Thank you everyone for the interesting replies!

On the last point I asked, it was more a question of whether I as DM should be stepping in to coach optimization I suppose. In my current game my daughter is a brand new player (Yay!), my wife is a long time roleplayer who dislikes game mechanics, my daughter's boyfriend is an experienced player who can talk serious optimization (I haven't played with him enough to know what type he is) and my best friend is in love with discussing and optimizing the heck out of game systems. He generally builds characters that are significantly better built than anyone at the table. He wants to be able to contribute in any situation while being the best at 1 or 2 (or 3 or 4). He is 2nd level warlock and is about to multiclass into Sorcerer...for rp reasons. I fear for my daughter the bard and my wife the ranger losing some enjoyment from what might be coming my way.

Sorcerer for RP reasons? Bro he a coffeelock. Is he a Hexblade too? I mean no offense, It's just a little suspicious for a known optimizer to go with a tier 1 multiclass like that. Remind him that the game is cooperative and outshining the table is bad form.

Your wife the Ranger is probably going to lose a little enjoyment if the campaign goes heavy on combat, simply because Rangers do not excel in combat. But with a Bard and a Warlock, she might make for a good straight-man in Social situations, and Exploration is pretty much Rangers whole shtick.

Your daughter the Bard should get plenty of chances to support the team, talk her way through encounters, and sling a few spells. I'd probably come up with some spell recommendations as she levels, but she'll be fine.

[Skylivedk]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

Yes to feats and multi-classing. I've also experienced with breaking feats and ASIs in two and doubling the amount gotten to allow more customisation (with some feat functions tiered).

Optimization exercises are usually just gymnastics. Like cross words if it cross words made me better at impro acting.

My groups (except my Tomb of Annihilation group) mostly optimise for characters and we're pretty liberal with rules especially for players who have low system mastery. Examples include making a strength monk, loading an Arcane Trickster with magic items to feign being a full caster and giving a drug-addicted ton of gold (didn't help him) and building a Go Go Gadget half steamborg gnome that could use heavy weapons.

[GlenSmash!]

Thank you everyone for the interesting replies!

On the last point I asked, it was more a question of whether I as DM should be stepping in to coach optimization I suppose. In my current game my daughter is a brand new player (Yay!), my wife is a long time roleplayer who dislikes game mechanics, my daughter's boyfriend is an experienced player who can talk serious optimization (I haven't played with him enough to know what type he is) and my best friend is in love with discussing and optimizing the heck out of game systems. He generally builds characters that are significantly better built than anyone at the table. He wants to be able to contribute in any situation while being the best at 1 or 2 (or 3 or 4). He is 2nd level warlock and is about to multiclass into Sorcerer...for rp reasons. I fear for my daughter the bard and my wife the ranger losing some enjoyment from what might be coming my way.

I've found that when you make sure each player has equal spotlight, it matters a lot less whose character is "optimized".

[Ignimortis]

Absolutely a fan of optimization. Optimization is what makes weirder concepts playable, if you can figure out how to spin it.

Not a fan of cookie-cutter builds, though. If you take the best option and cross it with another best option to get the greatest thing ever, be sure to consult your fellow players as to not overshadow them.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?


I like to not build a helpless character but I dunno about optimized.

We generally allow Feats and Multi-Classing but one of my DM's requires a reason to Multi-Class.

[sithlordnergal]

Just curious.

I was at GenCon when 5e came out and everyone I talked to was excited about an alternative to 'Mathfinder' and having to have a degree in gaming in order to play. Some friends who hadn't played D&D in years were suddenly back into the hobby for that very reason. So perhaps that is why it strikes me as odd that there seems to be so little love for simplicity and at times almost a hostile attitude towards anything that favors simple over optimization.

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization. Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back? Is this how people on here typically play? Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats? Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

I am a 100% optimizer, so I am very biased. While I'm not against simplification, I do find it far too limiting at times. If I were to play in a game with no multiclassing or feats, I'd likely play a Wizard, Druid, or Cleric because I don't like doing the same exact thing all the time, be it hitting things with a sword, shooting things with cantrips, or being forced to cast from a limited pool of spells. As for your actual questions:


Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back?

I find it to be fun mental exercises, but I don't really hold back when I play. If I come up with a concept, I will do my best to optimize it. Since I play in AL, its easy for me to test out my builds and I have an actual chance for them to reach level 20. So I can use them at all tiers of play. I also stumble onto some surprisingly good and unique combinations as a result. My personal favorite so far is a Paladin of the Ancients/Dream Druid/Divine Soul Sorcerer that uses PAM with a Shillelagh Quarterstaff, Shield, and Scorpion Armor from ToA.


Is this how people on here typically play?

I don't know about my fellow forum goers...but not at my shop. I'm considered the Optimizer there, with most players opting to avoid multiclassing and such. Funnily enough, the party considers the fact that I optimize to be annoying...even though every time I miss a game I return to find out at least one or two members of the party died when I missed a session. Go figure.


Everyone allows multi-classing? Everyone allows feats?

These two sort of go hand in hand. I always allow Multiclassing and Feats, and I am always happy to help players with their builds.


Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?

Yes and no...while I do try to optimize my build to be as good as possible, I do far more then just take the best possible combinationd. I use it to make a fun and unique character that I haven't played before. In fact, I actively avoid replaying class combos, unless I can put a neat spin on it. For example, I've played a standard Soradin before. I enjoyed it, they're at level 20, it was a great class combo...but I hadn't played that combo again till I came up with my Paladin/Druid/Sorcerer. And even then, I only have one level of Sorcerer for the Shield spell. That build is mostly Druid, and instead of focusing on Charisma I focused on Wisdom.


If it's the latter case and people are playing no-holds barred, drive it like you stole it...what about the players that can't keep up?

Well that's the thing, while I do optimize to be the best at what I optimized for I try to avoid showing off/flaunting it. Don't get me wrong, I've had moments where I was center stage, but those are rare and fleeting. I tend to do my best work on the side lines, supporting everyone else until it finally becomes apparent that I have little choice but to go all out against whatever we are facing.

[Waazraath]

Thank you everyone for the interesting replies!

On the last point I asked, it was more a question of whether I as DM should be stepping in to coach optimization I suppose. In my current game my daughter is a brand new player (Yay!), my wife is a long time roleplayer who dislikes game mechanics, my daughter's boyfriend is an experienced player who can talk serious optimization (I haven't played with him enough to know what type he is) and my best friend is in love with discussing and optimizing the heck out of game systems. He generally builds characters that are significantly better built than anyone at the table. He wants to be able to contribute in any situation while being the best at 1 or 2 (or 3 or 4). He is 2nd level warlock and is about to multiclass into Sorcerer...for rp reasons. I fear for my daughter the bard and my wife the ranger losing some enjoyment from what might be coming my way.

Can imagine... disbalance in the party is not good. I don't know if I would allow coffee locking, or up to what point. In addition, I'd ask him to optimize for buffing, not damage - sorcerers can be great at this, with twin. He can go wild with optimizing, while also making the rest of the party stronger. That would avoid problems in my experience.

[Kane0]

Is it something people find fun to do as mental exercises but when it comes to actually playing they are more laid back?
Is this how people on here typically play
Everyone allows multi-classing?
Everyone allows feats?
Everyone builds the absolutely most powerful combination of classes and feats possible?


For me:
Yes its fun to theorise, I’ve only seen one other player at my tables really give optimized chars a go (animate objects, polymorphing pixies, etc that he found online). I’m the most op savvy person at the table by a significant margin and I generally dont put it to use beyond making sure nobody makes terrible choices accidentally.

I always allow MCing and feats, but i handhold the casuals. Most of us pick up one or two feats, MCing is done less than half the time.

Oh my no. By my eyeball i see 25% joke builds, 25% homebrew playtesting, 25% simple and functional and 25% power trip

Edit: with regards to your group, have a word to the more savvy players out of game and see if they can tone it down a bit. Just make them aware of the other player’s less mechanically driven tendencies, most people are pretty understanding about these things especially if they are friends/family.

[Tawmis]

Optimizing has a loose definition...

Is putting your best roll in STR because you're a barbarian considered optimizing?

To me, I don't see it in 5e like I did, more notoriously in 2nd Edition...

I still remember the friend who made an Elf (so, +1 with longsword / longbow), Blade Singer (From the Complete Book of Elves) - who naturally picked Longsword (so now +2 with longsword) which granted +1 to attack and +1 damage (but loses the +1 to longbow), every 4 levels they got to do something crazy; including defending themselves while casting with an AC bonus to frontal attacks, all in Elf Chainmail.

Said person was notorious for making "power" characters, rather than focusing on an "interesting character with a in depth background."

And back then, I really didn't get it. But today, I am much, much, much, much older - and I've played D&D now with SO many more people - and now understand, different people play D&D for different reasons. Some play to experience this cool character concept and background; some play because they want to be the best there is at what they do; some play for the social aspect; some play just to hang out with friends; and some play for a mixture of it all.

[Jaryn]

I would also say it depends how you define optimisation.

Generally I hope to have 16 in a primary stat, and I like to have relevant skills. E.g. if I'm playing a druid I want animal handling and survival. I want my bard to have performance.

To me, it doesn't feel like I'm optimising overly, but you could make the case. Equally if I come up with a concept like an urchin divine soul sorcerer who has to seek out a pact with a deva to help him control his new found powers, I don't want to be prohibited because it happens to be a sorlock.

TL;DR I like effective, heroic characters, but concept is the main thing for me.

[ad_hoc]

On the last point I asked, it was more a question of whether I as DM should be stepping in to coach optimization I suppose.

This board represents a very small and specific niche of 5e players.

Don't base what you and your other players find fun on what some people on the internet find fun.

[Mork]

With the people on this forum you off course have a very specific selection of people who play DnD. These are the people who don't just go to a session to have fun, they also want to do something with DnD when they are not at the table. So the concentration of optimzers/powergamers etc. will be way higher than on average.

This all being said, I also like to optimize a lot, especially in 3.5 it was like an extra mini-game I could do on my own. That being said it is not fun to play dnd if not all the people are having fun. They way I solve it is by either helping other people optimize (if they want to but don't have the system mastery yet) or optimize around a strange concept. Be the best healer, best buffer, best sneaker, best tank. But not the best damage dealer, let that to the new players who need to get addicted to the game first. And this is also what I would recommend to OP friend. Challange him to optimize around something that doesn't overshadow the other players, having someone be good at everything is only fun for that person. I can totally understand for someone enthusiastic about gaming the system being distracted by winning the mini-game but if you (gently) remind them, or challenge them, to make a charachter that will make the other players enjoy their charachters more, they will often go for it:)

[Magicspook]

It's something I noticed as well in my time on this forum. I never heard the terms 'coffeelock' and 'sorcadin' before coming here. People even go so far as to have a pseudodragon familiar chainlock, but replace the pseudodragon statblock with that of the imp, just to squeeze every bit of advantage out of their build. Which I find weird, but to each their own.

[Laserlight]

I optimize every single character. Sometimes I optimize them for survivability, sometimes I optimize them for best fit to a character concept ("tobacco chewing hillbilly paladin"), sometimes I optimize them for ability to support the party without being the Face, sometimes it's for flexibility. I think everyone should optimize, once they decide what they want to optimize for.

I will point out to a player when their build does not match their tactics. I've seen quite a few players take a lightly armored type and try to play it as if it were a tank, and I've had a Tempest cleric who wanted to stand back and shoot her longbow instead of getting up close and using her AoEs. Half the time they appreciate the insight and change their tactics to suit their build, or vice versa. The other half, I mutter "I sure am glad I got Tensor's Floating Gurney as a ritual, cause otherwise I couldn't singlehandedly drag all of your unconscious bodies back to town, again."

[jaappleton]

I've found that when you make sure each player has equal spotlight, it matters a lot less whose character is "optimized".

THIS.

This is so important. It doesn’t matter how one person puts out 5 more damage per attack over everyone else when everyone gets a moment to shine.

If your Counterspell saves everyone from a TPK, YOU were the MVP of that fight.

It’s weird because usually I’m not a fan of the ‘Everybody is a winner!’ mentality, it works well in tabletop because everyone wants to feel like a badass hero. Give them that feeling. Doesn’t have to always be through combat, either.

[Conradine]

I would love to conciliate optimization and background, efficency ad verisimilitude.

[HappyDaze]

As a DM, I expect "soft optimization" where good choices are made with a balance of both mechanics and theme in mind, but abhor "hard optimization" where mechanical concerns to make the best crunchy choices eclipse all else.

[Maelynn]

There's a huge difference between being an optimiser/theorycrafter behind a computer and being an optimiser at the table.

If you like to come up with builds that are the epitome of the class, the ultimate glass cannon, the undefeatable survivor, then go right ahead. I even enjoy reading some of these builds to get some insight in the various classes, skills, spells, and what makes them good or bad. This insight is valuable to me both as a player and as a DM. However, I myself don't like to optimise. It leaves me wondering if there isn't something better, or if I'm overlooking something, and I end up never being satisfied with what I came up with. (in fact, right now I'm in the process of creating my first ever optimised character as a possible replacement for my current one, and I hate it)

If you like to bring such a character to the table, however, then make sure you don't stick out like a sore thumb compared to the rest of the party. If all players are optimisers then go right ahead, but often there's only 1-2 optimisers and the rest are people who don't care for it. With such differences it creates some unbalance, which can lead to other people not enjoying themselves - or to downright friction between the players. The DM could try and put the party in situations that give every character their own moment to shine, which might feel a little unfair as they need to work around the (imho rather selfish) powerhungry player, but which is one of the things a DM should do: make sure every player feels valued and able to contribute in certain situations.

[Willie the Duck]

I get that any forums are typically a home for people who are more into the game than the average player. So it stands to reason you are going to get a much higher concentration of people that really enjoy fine-tuning/optimization.

It's not even just about being more into. There is a quality about forums like these that the discussions tend to lean towards discussing two specific things: 1) things with verifiable numeric values, and 2) those that are long-term decision points.

I will use an example--my dad has never played D&D. His hobby passions are classic cars and photography. He visits forums pertaining to those hobbies not unlike this one is for TTRPGs. On those forums, the same tendencies pop up.
To the first (numerics): Even though the best avenue towards taking the best pictures probably are things like 'where do you go to take good landscape shots?' or the like, a whole bunch of time is spent on things like shutter speed or light readings and the like. Same with cars -- horsepower and tensile strength and anti-corrosion factors get disproportionate discussion time to more subject qualities like what car is most fun to behind the wheel of (because it's easier to discuss objective qualities than subjective).
To the second (long-term decision points): On those forums, a whole lot more time is spent on things that are unchanging past the point of purchase than those that you dial up or down as-needed. Zoom level or aperture diameter or, uh, some car example I can't think of right now don't get a lot of get a lot time in discussion compared to which accessory to get or which model of camera to buy or things like that. I think that's similar to how we spend a lot of time here discussing feats and multiclassing and the like, and not as much on which spells for your cleric or wizard to have memorized on a given day. I think that's because, at the table, you can't keep switching out characters (easily) and trying all the different feat and MC options, while you actually can try all the different memorization combinations. Likewise you can't buy all the different cars and accessories (unless you're Jay Leno, I guess), but you do get to explore all those options vicariously through online discussion.

In that same way, I feel that, even beyond the forum-dwellers here being a certain subset of the gamer totality, there is probably something about forum life here that incentivizes a topic-distribution unrepresentative of peoples' overall interests.


my best friend is in love with discussing and optimizing the heck out of game systems. He generally builds characters that are significantly better built than anyone at the table. He wants to be able to contribute in any situation while being the best at 1 or 2 (or 3 or 4). He is 2nd level warlock and is about to multiclass into Sorcerer...for rp reasons.

The guy who loves optimization theorycraft wants to play one of the most well-known optimization shortcuts to power for rp reasons. Well, it's entirely possible that that is the case. When 3rd edition came out, I was really into clerics and druids and was rather upset that I couldn't make and play one without being accused of doing so purely for their mechanical benefits. If it is for RP reasons, I suspect they'd be amenable for a soft ban on utilizing the synergistic combos that sorcerer-warlock MC are so well known for around here.

[Sigreid]

Worth mentioning that while forum theory crafting is a fin and interesting thing, there are people who think breaking the game is the real game. It's the part they think is fun. As long as they aren't ruining the game for others, whatever floats your boat dude.

[False God]

I enjoy optimization from a theoretical standpoint, and also as an aide to help me learn interactions and obscure elements (which 5E has very few of, comparatively), but I don't bring highly optimized builds to the table and it annoys me quite thoroughly when people do. It's, IMO, akin to net-decking in MTG. Part of the fun of the game is getting creative and putting together your own thing, even if it's not Tier 1 or Tier 0. If you're not doing that and just playing to "win" you're missing out on the spirit of the game.

It is especially bothersome in 5E, which as an edition has made an effort to cut down on the possibilities for optimizing, and much of the core material is just straight-up good. As well as having softened up the bad guys, the reasons for needing an optimized character at the table often boil down to a player wanting to show off, and little more.

There are a couple "netdeckers" at the AL table I co-DM, and it's painfully obvious.

[Chronos]

My answer is complicated. I always optimize all of my characters, but I almost never optimize them for power. I optimize to do the best job I can at fitting a particular character concept.

Separately from that, I also enjoy optimizing for power, as a mental exercise, but consider it to be an activity completely separate from playing D&D as a game. I might come up with crazy overpowered builds capable of casting free Miracles at level 12, or whatever, but I would never dream of bringing something like that to a table.

5th edition, I find, is close to as capable of the former as previous editions are, but much less capable of the latter. While there are still plenty of weird edge cases in the rules, most of them now seem to take the form of something not being possible that should be, not something being possible that shouldn't be.

[patchyman]

It does grind my gears a little bit when people play their characters poorly however. I don't expect everyone to remember all the rules but try and remember your own class features at least :smalleek:

I once had a player complain (after the end of the mini-campaign), that his character should be able to use some sort of mechanic to be more effective in situations where the chips were down. He recognized that being able to use it all the time would be overpowered, so there should be a limiting mechanic, but it should be available more than once per day.

He was playing a 6th level Champion Fighter.

[JNAProductions]

To the OP's question, having not read the in-between:

Most of these fine folk on the board are a fan of it. To varying degrees-some people like to optimize just enough to contribute well, some people like to go whole-hog into the weeds of op-fu, some people actively try to break the game (in a theoretical sense-likely NOT in a real game).

There's less material to work with than in 3.5, and the general level of balance is a lot tighter (not perfect, certainly, but a hell of a lot closer) meaning there's less major tricks to pull off.

For myself? I enjoy hearing about the TO (like Coffeelocks and Wish-Sim Chaining) and like to build potent, but not ridiculous, characters in play.

[patchyman]

Across my 2 regular gaming groups (so about 9 people), there is one I would describe as a “soft” optimizer, in that his character builds are more driven by power considerations than RP considerations.

We play with feats. MC depends on the game.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

I would posit that most of us, no matter if we consider ourselves optimizers or not, aren't accurately portrayed by the theory-crafting that goes on here. So many of the builds and optimization guides are based around high-level characters that relatively few people probably ever actually get to play. Outside of doing a 20th level campaign or one-shot adventure, most of what goes on here I would consider game theory. I think there's something very attractive to many of us about having a group where we can discuss "hyper-optimization" just to see what's possible. But I think it's rare that it translates to most of our tables at a 1:1 ratio.

Edit: It's also noteworthy that these sorts of things are far more enjoyable as creative endeavors when done in a communal context, albeit an online forum. It's sort of like shallow but broad extension of hundreds of conversations that many of us have in person with close friends who also love D&D. For those who don't have that personal community yet, it serves as a way to continue pursuing the hobby while (hopefully) looking for a deeper community in person.

[KorvinStarmast]

The game as published encourages a gentle form of optimization. You can see this in the Quick Builds which are aimed at new players, or players new to a class. Four examples from the Basic Rules/PHB:

Quick Build
You can make a cleric quickly by following these suggestions. First, Wisdom should be your highest ability score, followed by Strength or Constitution. Second, choose the acolyte background.

Quick Build
You can make a fighter quickly by following these suggestions. First, make Strength or Dexterity your highest ability score, depending on whether you want to focus on melee weapons or on archery (or finesse weapons). Your next-highest score should be Constitution. Second, choose the soldier background.

Quick Build
You can make a rogue quickly by following these suggestions. First, Dexterity should be your highest ability score. Make Intelligence your next-highest if you want to excel at Investigation. Choose Charisma instead if you plan to emphasize deception and social interaction. Second, choose the criminal background


Quick Build
You can make a wizard quickly by following these suggestions. First, Intelligence should be your highest ability score, followed by Constitution or Dexterity. Second, choose the sage background. Third, choose the light, mage hand, and ray of frost cantrips, along with the following 1st-level spells for your spellbook: burning hands, charm person, mage armor, magic missile, shield, and sleep

But one thing that I have learned to coach new players on is the Constitution score. Constitution has some effects that spread all over the game.
1. HP at leve 1 and bonuses thereafter
2. Recovery of HP via HD + Con Mod
3. Concentration on a variety of spells
4. Saving throws versus poison
For new players, poison is a common problem in tier 1 encounters. Snakes, spiders, death dogs, giant scorpions - lots of tier 1 encounter monsters apply poison to attacks or other effects. (And if the game starts in Chult/ToA, even more poisonous stuff is in there).

Do I Like Optimization? Sort of.
I want to have a character be reasonably effective (see the post that Pex made, I like the points that he makes). I also learned back in AD&D 1e that Constitution is a stat you must never put a low score in. It influences too many things in play.

Here is an example of a character that I built with point buy.
Ranger (eventually a gloom stalker) variant Human. Because we were using the variant encumbrance rules, and we were going to be trekking all over the jungles of Chult carrying what we needed, I chose to add a bit of Strength rather than Wisdom, which incurs a cost on the eventual spell save DC for this class of character.

S 14
D 16
C 14
I 10
W 12
Ch 8
Feat: Medium Armor Master.
Criminal(Spy) background.

Why that feat? We were a four player party (initially a three player party) and we were a cleric, paladin, and a ranger.
I wanted to be able to wear enough armor to help the paladin with front line melee as needed, but not lose the ability to be sneaky. This Ranger currently wears a chain shirt. While his standard load out is no shield, long bow (Archery fighting style) when we go indoors/underground, his standard configuration is three daggers in the belt (for throwing as needed) one rapier, and wielding a shield.

We have no rogue in our party. I am the Scout both above ground and underground.

The fourth player was a bugbear barbarian, but he had to drop out. Our next fourth player is a lore bard. (Still no rogue). We added a monk, but lost the paladin.

So now I'm the tank in a party with: a monk, a ranger, a lore bard, a tabaxi nature cleric who is not wearing heavy armor.

I put my first ASI into Dexterity. That was not as hard a choice as it might have been, since we ran into the Sage of Orolunga and she granted this Ranger a boon of +2 wisdom. (DM called it, I had no input). Had I not gotten that boon, I was pretty much set on boosting wisdom to 14 since I was going to be getting a few more spells to choose, some of which may need a better spell save DC.

Is my ranger Optimized?
Sorta yes and sorta no.

[Talionis]

I would agree that generally people here do appreciate optimization, but I really doubt no one here plays anything but optimized characters.

We have people who try to optimize small portions of the game or to optimize something that is inherently weak to a usable level. A good example of this is optimizing Magic Stones. Dexterity is so powerful a stat in the game generally Magic Stones loses your Bonus Action.

I also would say that most of the people on a site like this have been playing for a long time, so they are looking for new things.

But once I play often start with a plan for an optimized build, and then deviate from it to fill party needs or role play. I know what an optimal build for my character is and I have looked for a nuanced interactions that might be fun or clever, but then I often do not max my casting stat and take an unusual feat or adjust my plans in a different direction. Maybe I take ritual caster because we don't really have a party Wizard. It is not optimized for my character, but it makes play more enjoyable.

If you theorycraft and start from an optimized place then you can chose to deviate, but at least you do not miss an opportunity.

[Zetakya]

Another thing to be aware of is that quite a lot of this board is at least sometimes the DM; keeping aware of popular optimisation routes (and the RAW objections to them, in some cases) is a good idea to prevent the lowest kind of power-gamer from trying to ruin your game.